Hi.

Since this topic is something who has been discussed some times earlier
on and also is a important issue, I thought it might be of some interest
for the members here at SZ Technics Forum as well.

As you will see, representatives from both the manufacturers such as GEM
and 3rd party Softwarehouses such as Midi Spot also take part in the tread.
I think that is great to see, besides of the fact that it don't make it to
be less informative and interesting reading.

GJ


http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/010240.html

Gunnar,

Very interesting discussion. Until more cases reach the courts, copywrite issue will remain a controvercey.

Fran in Florida

had a good look and has me thinking how many styles I own ?. Thanks for the link

gunnar out tonight playing the kn7000 will be looking over my sholder

------------------
rog.

Rog
Good luck tonight - why would you have bought them unless you intended to use them and in a public place...!
Plenty of swaps available if interested, but Sssssh don't tell anybody else!!!
Rog

Hi All,

Certainly copyright law is on of the most misunderstood and most complicated laws around especially for software which styles are. In fact the styles would actually be considered data since it requires a program to read it.

The programs I wrote for the last company I worked for were never sold. By that I mean we would sell electronic data and "loan" you the program to read it therefore the copyright remained completely under our control.

Most people want to believe that because they pay a something it belongs to them. But have you ever read the "license" agreements that you are told to read when installing software? In almost all cases, you are granted a "License to Use" the software but it still belongs to the company that sold it. You have no legal right to it at all.




------------------
Heather- Leesburg, FL PR54

Rog M,

I knew by your past posts, that you and I as Englishmen have a bit of the devil in us.

Fran in Florida

Why do we need Midispot files anyway when there are hundreds of other files equally as good as or even better than theirs available on the market?

Isn't our contribution to the copyright fee included in the price?

Aud (U.K.)

Well, I happen to like them for my style of playing, as
many others happen to like Neil Blake, Carillon or even
Technics.

It's not only about MidiSpot, it's about all commercial
software, even Technics stuff bought at Technote.
And yes, we pay for it when buy, but do that mean that
you can make it free downloadable at your website if you
happen to have one, or copy and send it to all other of
the keyboardusers you know about via e-mail as soon as
you bought any?
(Those who remember will know that this was the reason
that Technote closed down the Technics forum some years
ago)

Regarding to what files are better than others, guess
it's more about taste of musicstyle. There is a lot of
the Technics styles, both sold separately and onboard
the kb who I don't like at all, but do that mean that it
is bad quality?


Sorry if I offended anyone by post the link, thougt it
would be for some interest rather than make anybody feel
the danger of not collect 1st class commersial files for
free.

Happy playing, with or without styles.
GJ

Hiya Gunnar
I like you am completely opposed to sharing someone else's commercial work on the net through a web site - it's doing that person out of a legitimate living....
However the copyright requirements are obviously complicated because Midi-spot themselves hide many of their song specific rhythms behind innocuous titles and maybe that's where the problem lies.
A generic rhythm with an innocuous title picked up on the web which can be converted to use for a particular song may be deemed to be nothing more than a standard built-in keyboard rhythm from some machine or other and therefore fair game for sharing...

Many years ago I went to solicitor regarding copyright of my professional photographs, colour copiers were just coming on the market, and asked him what the law was. His £35 answer was, "no lawyer will tell you the law of copyright. they will tell you their interpretation of it"!!!! Walter.

Yeah, it's really complicated Roger, at least for me who don't have
lawschool education.
But maybe this also have something to do about average common sense?

Most all keyboards have a lot of styles or presets where the titles
hint at different songs or artists. So do also several houndreds, if
not tousands of styles made by 3rd party suppliers.
I think it's great, and if the style / pattern are made as well as I
easily by i.e. mute a instrument in the accomp can use it for more
and different songs, it's even better.
The option with more than one intro & end etc. do this more flexible.
But, I can't see why that should make it more legal to spread the
style around as "freeware" by the buyers/users as long as it is made
and sold as (copyrighted) commercial addons, or what?

I think what it is about, is why bother to create any "food" for us
and our keyboards if only one of us buy, and that customer offer it
for free to the rest of the world?
It's sure nice to get it at first, but at the end there will be no
more developement and new stuff to other than from the "one and only"
(if any) who also will know to elevate the charge........

Happy playing
GJ

Gunnar,

Posting a 3rd party style on a web site or sharing a style on a forum is wrong.

However I do not think that using a style for a song and sharing the song with fellow musicians on this forum is wrong.

There is no way that copywrite laws will stop sharing a style with a friend.

Wholesale sharing is a different story.

Fran in Florida

Fran in Florida

I guess sharing that song as a midi or an MP3 is fine because we'd struggle to convert it back to a style file.
Rog

Fran, I don't think it's the big deal if you happen to share a piece of
music that "accidentally" contain such a style, even if it's legal by
law or not.
But, if it's done by i.e. use of a e-mail list to reach between two
and maybe hundreds of "members", would you still call it to share it
with a friend?

Roger, by use of i.e. mp3 you'll also be able to share your music to
other than the users who have the same instrument model as yourself,
as long as noone claim the copyrights of the tune......

Oh well, guess what, whatever way we turn the body, the butt will be
behind the front.

GJ

This thread is just going around in circles. At the end of the day Gunnar is right in what he says about copywrited material, he is also right about Technote dumping the forum. Rather than pursue members who were illegally and openly touting their copywrited material around, they just chose to close the site down.
It is simple and it does not take any working out and it does not matter how you dress it up you buy commercial styles, standard midi files or whatever that have copywrite, you do not legaly have the right to share them with anybody. It does not matter whether you think that is right or not that is how it is.
This has been discussed so many times you would think it would be clear.

Hiya Johnnie
What's not clear when downloading is what is copyrighted and shouldn't be there in the first place, and what isn't copyrighted and OK - for example I've seen so many different versions of Achy Breaky Heart on the internet over the years that I'm sick of the number....
Rog

Hi Rog
It is the responsibility of the website owner to make sure he has no copyright stuff to download.

Hi All,

Johnny.c, any time there is a discussion about copyrights (especially concerning music)it will go around in circles because the music industry wants us to believe any and all forms of sharing music without paying for it is wrong.

Fran, according to the music people not only would using a copyrighted style in a song and sharing it be wrong, just sharing the song is wrong unless you wrote it.

There are so many licenses involved it's like your auto. You need a title to have it, a license to drive it, a license to put it on the road and in some places a license to say it does not pollute the air.

Music is the same, there are copyrights, performance rights, recording rights, distrubution rights and who knows want else.

Here is a funny one, If I write a song and I do not distribute any copies of the song to any person "All Copyrights Rights" remain exclusively mine, I could perform the song every day to an audience and yet that is not considered distribution. Which means that if you start to sing the song on the way out of the hall after hearing it I could sue you for performing an undistrubuted song.

Because I have a couple of registered copyrighted songs I wanted to know what my rights were. Even after belonging to the US copyright offce subscription service for 4 years I could never completely understand it and they were sending me stuff that was suppose to make it simple.

What I did learn was that if "I" write something (anything a song, a poem, an article) and I attach the copyright symbol or the word "Copyright" to it with my name and the year. It is considered to be copyrighted. If I give copies to someone I loose a few rights and registering it only makes it easier to prove in court but is not a requirement for copyright protection. All the other stuff is settled in court.

If all the laws were clear the recording industry would not be sueing so many people only to have the courts say they cann't.

And while some pleople do not like these types of discussions on this forum I find them a bit refreshing so thanks Gunnar for the thread.


------------------
Heather- Leesburg, FL PR54

[This message has been edited by shcox (edited 03-04-2005).]

You're most welcome Heather, and yes, it's interesting stuff,
even if it's a bit boring as well.

The main reason why I posted the link to the tread at GenArr
was that I thought it was great to see people from companies
such as GEM and MidiSpot also participated in the discussion.
Also I think it's good to see that it's more like:
"Com'on, we'll help you solve the problems" rather than tell
you that a lawyer are on the way to sue you.

Additionally it's maybe a reminder for me as well as others
to be a bit careful and not step out in too deep water when
we create websites and share our musicstuff.

Happy Playing.
GJ

Heather I love a discussion but about facts
This is todays news hot off the press
click on the link below so as I said opinions do not matter this is how it is
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/3722428.stm
UK music to sue online 'pirates'
The British music industry is to sue 28 internet users it says are illegally swapping music online
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/3722428.stm

Wonder if this is the same lot that tried to sue an 82 year old woman, who didn't even own a computer!!!??? Walter.

Copyright© 2005 Bill Forrest, San Jose, California
I Put this copyright notice on my songs I write UNLESS, I release them to public distribution without copyright, then they are yours and YOU could copyright them if you wanted to
Never a problem.
Bebop

It is the same as inventions or trademarks or whatever unless someone steals somebody elses work

Hi Johnny.C,

Thank you for sharing the link.
The people who have settled out of court have actually screwed up the system bacause until a case actually goes to court we don't really know if it is legal or not. At this point there are still conflicking opinions.

However, styles can not legally be consider music since styles themselves contain no melody and no actual cords. They are considered to be a form of computer software and that also can be copyrighted.


------------------
Heather- Leesburg, FL PR54